Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     Laurent Dufour <ldufour@linux.ibm.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
        npiggin@gmail.com, christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu,
        dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/10] cpu/SMT: Allow enabling partial SMT states via sysfs
In-Reply-To: <20230615154635.13660-8-ldufour@linux.ibm.com>
References: <20230615154635.13660-1-ldufour@linux.ibm.com>
 <20230615154635.13660-8-ldufour@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Thu, 22 Jun 2023 11:12:24 +0200
Message-ID: <87legb7tdz.ffs@tglx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jun 15 2023 at 17:46, Laurent Dufour wrote:
>  
> -	if (ctrlval != cpu_smt_control) {
> +	orig_threads = cpu_smt_num_threads;
> +	cpu_smt_num_threads = num_threads;
> +
> +	if (num_threads > orig_threads) {
> +		ret = cpuhp_smt_enable();
> +	} else if (num_threads < orig_threads) {
> +		ret = cpuhp_smt_disable(ctrlval);
> +	} else if (ctrlval != cpu_smt_control) {
>  		switch (ctrlval) {
>  		case CPU_SMT_ENABLED:
>  			ret = cpuhp_smt_enable();

This switch() is still as pointless as in the previous version.

OFF -> ON, ON -> OFF, ON -> FORCE_OFF are covered by the num_threads
comparisons.

So the only case where (ctrlval != cpu_smt_control) is relevant is the
OFF -> FORCE_OFF transition because in that case the number of threads
is not changing.

          force_off = ctrlval != cpu_smt_control && ctrval == CPU_SMT_FORCE_DISABLED;

	  if (num_threads > orig_threads)
		  ret = cpuhp_smt_enable();
	  else if (num_threads < orig_threads || force_off)
		  ret = cpuhp_smt_disable(ctrlval);

Should just work, no?

Thanks,

        tglx